Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
Within this discussion concerning marketing, it is useful to highlight
that much of the literature discussing VFR travel refers to it being a 'market'
(Braunlich & Nadkarni, 1995; Denman, 1988; Hay, 1996; Lehto
et al
., 2001;
McKercher, 1994, 1995; Morrison
et al
., 1995, 2000; Seaton, 1994; Seaton &
Palmer, 1997; Seaton & Tagg, 1995; Yaman, 1996; Yuan
et al
., 1995). However,
in cases where VFR travellers are staying with friends or relatives there are
no property rights being exchanged, and therefore VFR travel in those cases
is not really a market. Visitors staying with friends and relatives do not tend
to pay their host for their lodging and, as such, there has been no property
exchange. The whole concept of a market involves exchange between buyers
and sellers, who are connected by four flows. These flows are communica-
tion, products/services, money and information (Kotler
et al
., 2006). Without
the host acting as a seller and receiving money in exchange for goods (the
accommodation), this form of tourism cannot be considered a market.
Nonetheless, VFR travellers do enter into market transactions; for
instance, as they enter a theme park the seller is receiving something in return
for the transaction. Those VFR travellers staying in commercial accommoda-
tion are also entering into market transactions. However, VFR travel cannot
be categorised in its entirety as a market. The assertion that VFR travel is a
worthwhile market segment cannot really be made, and in the broad manner
in which it is made authors are only really borrowing the term. VFR travel
is a market segment only for some organisations and operators. While VFR
travellers may spend money and become involved in activities that involve
market transactions, their accommodation, if they are staying with friends
or relatives, is a form of non-marketised tourism. As such, the trip itself may
involve both non-marketised and marketised activities.
Marketing specialists have developed a set of four criteria as appropriate
determinants of whether a market segment should be considered feasible
for targeting. The four criteria, all four of which must stand, are that the
segment needs to be: identifiable and measurable; accessible; substantial;
and actionable (Leiper, 2004). As outlined above, VFR travel is problematic
to identify and measure and, as such, this market segment criterion can
be difficult to satisfy. However, VFR travellers are accessible, primarily
through the hosts (Backer, 2007, 2008, 2011). For some tourism operators,
VFR travellers may be a part of their set of consumers, but they may not
be a substantial part. Therefore, the third market segment criterion may
be difficult to meet in many instances. In terms of being actionable, the
marketing budget of many small tourism operators may be so limited that
they would not be able to justify dedicating these resources to marketing to
VFR travellers. In many cases, for those operators with few or no staff and
a small operating budget, the difficulty of identifying these consumers and
measuring their consumption would make marketing impractical. However,
there may be a case to argue that VFR travellers are a market segment for
certain operators and worthy of targeting.
